For once, I'm going to be nice to the Liberal Party..

[BolivarianHero]

Why do people say that the Liberal Party is doing so poorly and that Ignatieff is such a poor choice to lead it? I mean, look at the hand they're dealt with in comparison to when Chretien become PM...

1993:

-Divided right
-Discredited Progressive Conservative Party (Mulroney was a swear word, and the party was led by some B.C. Socred reject who finished 3rd in a convention that fucking Bill Vanderzalm won...That's like finishing 3rd in a hockey tournament won by Belarus.)
-NDP brand tarnished by unpopular B.C. and Ontario governments and party has still not recovered from Broadbent resignation
-No Green Party whatsoever (or at best, it had a Christian Heritage Party level of influence)
-Only other strong party's sphere of influence limited to one province

Today:

-Right is united
-Harper not especially popular, but not a swear word in the way that Mulroney was
-NDP has most popular leader since Ed Broadbent and is not suffering from the image problems of unpopular governments in 2 of Canada's 3 most populated provinces
-BQ only marginally weaker than in 1993
-Green Party routinely polls close to 10%

[Spazito]

1. Ignatieff is not the 'in your face' leader the Liberals need right now, imo...

Love him or hate him, Chretien was always in the Cons' face, didn't back down on anything. Ignatieff needs to take a lesson from Chretien and get in the faces of harper and his cabal at each and every opportunity.

The only reason harper is not a 'swear word' is because the Liberal leadership, beginning with Martin and continuing with Ignatieff, sends mixed messages in the way in which they choose to 'oppose' him, imo.

[HeresyLives]

2. LOL how is this being 'nice' to the Liberals?

[daleo]

3. Harper is polling at roughly 30%

That's getting close to swear word territory. The Jaffer affair will knock that down another 3 or4 points in the next poll, I bet.

The corporate class still hasn't figured out just how disastrous the current political and economic mix of policies actually is. You would think 12 years of no gains in the stock market and bonds scraping along near 0% would have clued them in by now. But for now, they continue with the same old folly, which means pushing the Harper message and agenda. It is difficult for any opposing leader to break through that. Look how the right in the U.S. is toying with the idea of a Palin presidency, even after the Bush disaster.

[HeresyLives]

4. Heh, I know people who use Harper's name as a swear word.

And you can see by 4 years of polling that Harper isn't getting anywhere with the electorate.

Meanwhile, the Liberals have had a 'perfect storm'. 3 leaders in a short time, little money and constant Con attacks...and not just standard political attacks, but vicious ones. But still, they are generally tied in the polls.

Ignatieff needs a platform, that's all. Because the govt is there for the taking.

We'll see what the Think Tank at the end of March produces by way of numbers.

[CHIMO]

5. Your Logic

Lacks facts.

Chretien had years of Ottawa experience and knew how to use the knife.

The NDP leader threw away his chance of having bed rock Liberals shift to him when he fought against Martin instead of Harper in the 2006 elections. He could have been the alternate in the last election.

Izzy is still trying to figure out what is going on.

Harper is just turning up the temperature slowly, so no-one realises that we are gradually being cooked.

And your analysis is bent towards the Liberals. By that logic I would wager that you don't think the Green's are conservative.